.45 acp super soft bhn experiment

[Krh1326]

Hi all…
I tried to search this, and found some snippets and info, but just figured I’d flat out ask.

I would like to cast , load and shoot the softest .45 acp boolit possible, without leading barrel, nor deformation, while chambering. I have been running about 7.5 bhn, with great results.
I’m using a “hollowpoint molds” custom Lee 230 gr HP TC . I expect to stay in normal FPS of around 830 .

I can powder coat and add PB GC. I know these steps allow for somewhat softer boolits.
Can anyone save me some trial and error, and share any bhn data?

[megasupermagnum]

Neither gas checks or powder coat will help you, but it doesn't have to. A pure lead plain based bullet could perform fine in 45 acp. The issue you will run into is the deformation of the nose sometimes. Based on what I see, the nose on that bullet should be reasonably stout, and truncated cone bullets tend to do better as well. Another problem you can run into is your brass sizing down your bullets. If this were a revolver you could use an expander as needed. In a semi auto you don't want to go too light on neck tension. A crimp only helps so much to prevent setback, which you don't want at all. You are already really close to pure lead as it is, you are in the ballpark of 30:1 alloy. If you aren't seeing the expansion you want with 30:1, I suggest a larger/deeper hollow point pin.

[Krh1326]

Thank you sir. It’s not so much that I’m not happy with the expansion, it’s more of the question, how much more can I get? Unfortunately, there are no ranges near me, that allow any targets, other than standard paper targets… so the only time I get to play with wet newspapers, is when I venture upstate.

[Froogal]

I have loaded some .45 acp using the same bullets that I use for .45 Colt. .452, 200 grain, LRNFP. I cast those bullets with 1-20 lead from Roto-metals. These test to about a 10bhn. I have actually shot only a few through my 1911A1, but inspection of the bore after revealed NO leading. Accuracy was acceptable. A few misses, but that is me.

[HWooldridge]

Velocity-wise, I bet you could use pure lead with a decent lube - 45 ACP is close to many of the old BP loads so it should work just fine. I have shot very soft bullets in mine but don't think I ever used 100% lead - although I do have some 40/1 ingots that I might try.

[gwpercle]

You will have an easier time working up a soft-alloy boolit without the hollow point .
The soft nose - hollow point likes to deform .
Try small HP ... large ones will get battered as bhn goes down .
I use 8.5 bhn and Truncated Cone boolit ... w/o HP it will still mushroom nicely .
Soft boolits , 45 acp and hollow points are a fine line to walk .
I went no HP and got satisfactory results ... try it and see what happens .
Good Luck ,
Gary

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

Do you have an idea what the pressure of your load is?

Besides a bunch of other real good lead and lead alloy info in this link...there is the quote below, from a chart.
http://www.lasc.us/CastBulletNotes.htm


Approximate "Maximum" Chamber Pressure For Lead Alloys (PSI)

Plumbers lead, stick on WW 13,000

[Krh1326]

I thank you all, for the great input.

[Froogal]

For what it's worth, the 10bhn bullets that I shoot, when hitting a STEEL target, just kind of flatten out into a round disc and fall to the ground right below the target. I then collect those discs, melt 'em down, and turn 'em back into bullets.

[Larry Gibson]

Do you have an idea what the pressure of your load is?

Besides a bunch of other real good lead and lead alloy info in this link...there is the quote below, from a chart.
http://www.lasc.us/CastBulletNotes.htm

I often wonder where the BHN for lead of 5.0 comes from as listed in that site along with Lyman's CBHs and other sources. According to the bureau of weights and measures standards the BHN of pure lead is 7.0. I have BHN tested numerous samples of certified pure lead and always have come up with 7.0. Wonder where the "5 BHN" comes from?

Also, I shoot Lee 230 TC bullets cast of 40-1 alloy, sized at .451 and lubed with 50/50, which weight 235 gr at 825 fps which run 17 - 18,000 psi [measured via Oehler M43 using a Contender barrel] with no leading or other problems.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

Larry,
I must admit, I haven't given much thought to the BHN of pure Lead (or near pure soft Lead). I've just accepted the 5 number as fact. I am only responding, because I have planned for later this Winter or Spring, a experiment per say, with two different common lead alloys and pure Lead...cast in 40 cal, for a simple and fun BHN vs Accuracy comparison (40S&W pistol). I may have to do some extensive hardness testing (Lee hardness tester) of some of my near pure soft alloys (I have numerous batches from different sources) and some known Pure Lead that I have (two batches from two sources).

Thinking out loud here, I would bet technique (with the Lee hardness tester) when measuring pure Lead or Near pure, would be important, and possibly easily corruptible with carelessness, due to the softness...especially when dimpling Boolits or RBs.

Long ago, I bought some SOWW alloy ingots from "TheCaptain." When they arrived, I tested those ingots with my Lee tester and get the reading of 6.3 ...Hopefully my technique back then, using the Lee tester/microscope was trustworthy. When I do this 40 cal experiment in a few months, I will be extra careful.


I assume you've seen the "extended" BHN Lee chart that someone came up with...They go down to 4 BHN.
http://www.texas-mac.com/sitebuilder/images/Extended_BHN_Chart_for_Lee_Tester3-728x491.jpg

[243winxb]

I test many things, I read on here. Doing your own testing is the only way to know what works.

Soft lead caused bullet nose to hang up on feed ramp. BHN unknown. Never tested BHN, except thumb nail test.

Colt Series 70 GC 45acp that runs 100% till I fed it soft. Lyman 200 gr BB bullets.

Pure may produce, as cast bullet, smaller in diameter then needed. No antimony = smaller diameters.

[Larry Gibson]

Yes, I have had a copy of the Lee extended table for some time. All my tests with the Lee Tester on certified lead come up with 6.8 to .7.2 BHN. I always do a minimum of 3 tests per sample and average. I find with the Lee scope mounted in a microscope it is easy to get very accurate readings. I think the slight variation in the indent as measured with the Lee scope is more likely caused slight inconsistencies that occur when the indent is made. Over the years of testing numerous alloys for casting bullets I've come think figuring less than a .5 BHN is immaterial.

Here's the BHN for alloys/metals from NSIS;

309502

[justindad]

If you are shooting light loads with the soft lead, a lighter recoil spring can help with setback. I have a heavy recoil spring and shoot hotter loads, and now my old plated ammo has setback issues.
*
The lighter spring will also help keep nose deformation at bay.
*
Of course, the light spring goes with light loads.

[Krh1326]

Larry- you have helped me with so much , on this forum… if I can answer a question for you, it would be my pleasure.

My base source of “ Pure” lead , is water main pipe, and X-ray room soft sheeting. I collected much of the sheeting, as a union tradesman, and my son works for a construction company that does mains, hydrants and road repairs… he is always bringing me home chunks of broken mains.

The X-ray sheeting, is about the softest metal that I’ve ever seen. I just cut it in strips to fit in pot, with tin snips. With Lee tester, that stuff comes in consistently 4.5 bhn. It is so supple, it’s amazing. If you hold a strip up, from the bottom, it will slowly tip over and bend… very very slowly, over your hand, holding it up.

The lead water main piping comes out to 5 bhn, very consistently. I do not include the solder jointing materials, when I melt it up.

I honestly believe the reason, that these test so super soft, is because they are both industrial used and certified and rated. Meaning.. they are/ were made from very high QC , and prolly virgin materials. Nothing ever introduced to any of it… ever.

Maybe sometimes you get some “pure” lead from a source that doesn’t really know what could have been added to it… especially if it’s been used, recycled, reclaimed… who knows?

[Bigslug]

At 7-8 BHN, you're already running pretty dang soft alloy. I did a pretty nerdy test on alloy made exclusively from smelted down jacketed bullet cores and it came out at 9.5BHN. Keep in mind that's soft enough to swage into jackets, and also make JHP's out of.

Depending on what you're trying to do, there may be a legit argument to harden up your metal slightly and go for a little LESS expansion. .45 bullets that turn into parachutes tend not to penetrate very well, which is fine for bunny and coyote control, but for larger game or social purposes, it may be a liability.

I'd also be concerned with how a soft bullet survives the trip up the feed ramp. It's worth manually ejecting a few after chambering them to see how they take the hits. Assuming you're running a 1911, I found the least disruption to the nose of a not-well-suited-to-autos design when I used magazines with the military-style tapered feed lips since they're more akin to a Mauser's controlled-feed system and allow the nose to pivot upward more readily than parallel-lip designs.

[BJung]

I'm about where you are: still experimenting with bullet alloy bhn based on pencil tests and lead source. I have few places I can shoot hp bullets to test for expansion. The closest I know of is BLM land 5 hours away. Here is the data I've collected and the lead I'm working with.

pellet lead is 95% to 100% lead. I could have a bhn = 6 or the Crossmans have a bhn = 9. I haven't tested my pellet lead ingots for bhn yet. I plan to cast hp bullets soon.
.22lr lead has around 1-1/2% antinomy. Some say it is 6-8bhn. Another says it is 7-7.5 bhn. I haven't tested my .22lr lead ingots for bhn yet.
.22lr lead makes a good hunting bullet when quenched. I have casted Mihec hp bullets to be tested
.22lr + 2% Sn -= 14-16 bhn. I plan to cast Mihec hp bullets with this soon.
I have plans to pull .22lr dudes and test the bhn of each brand to list, out of curiosity, even though I just melt all my .22lr range scrap together.

jacketed bullet scrap. Most jacketed bullets have 2-3% antinomy with maybe 1% tin. They test at 8-9.5bhn. I plan to cut some JHP range scrap bullets and test them for BHN

For low velocity hp loads below 1000 fps, 25:1 alloy at 9bhn is good. 6lb pure lead and 1-1/2lb 50/50 solder. bhn is not what is important, alloy composition is.

Here's some other references from my library:

http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell_Book_Chapter_13_CastingHPBullets.htm
http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell_Book_textonly2.pdf


Here is a link of someone on this forum that did tests on his range scrap: https://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?269789-Careful-Analysis-of-Segregated-Range-Scrap-Smelt&highlight=segregated+range+scrap

I separate my range scrap and plan to use the JHP cores for my .38-148 WC and .45-200 SWC bullets. Scrap that looks like it was a core and separated from the jacket is used for my 45-230 RN. I save hardcast bullets and add them to large pieces for my 9mm and 40 S&W bullets. Then there's the flakes. I make fishing weights with those.

[Kosh75287]

Another thing you could try is using cast 250 gr. LSWC or RNFP, and keep your velocity low. A 250 gr. bullet at ~700 f/s closely resembles the performance of the .455 Webley, which had a well-deserved reputation as a fight-stopper.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

Yes, I have had a copy of the Lee extended table for some time. All my tests with the Lee Tester on certified lead come up with 6.8 to .7.2 BHN. I always do a minimum of 3 tests per sample and average. I find with the Lee scope mounted in a microscope it is easy to get very accurate readings. I think the slight variation in the indent as measured with the Lee scope is more likely caused slight inconsistencies that occur when the indent is made. Over the years of testing numerous alloys for casting bullets I've come think figuring less than a .5 BHN is immaterial.

Here's the BHN for alloys/metals from NSIS;

309502

Thanks for that chart info.

I also do the three sample test (from same casting session), If I get one reading that's "out there", I usually do another three sample test.

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

SNIP>>>

The lead water main piping comes out to 5 bhn, very consistently. I do not include the solder jointing materials, when I melt it up.


I've been told that 'some' Lead water main pipe has a small percentage of antimony, depends on manufacturer and their extrusion technique. This is due to the alloy with 1% to 3% antimony flowing more uniform and making a better quality extrusion.

I mention that, if you get some pipe that could have been from different manufacturers, they could be different. I've also heard that a extruded lead pipe sample that hasn't been melted won't measure correctly, until it's been melted and "cast" into a mold.

Years ago, I bought 100+ lbs of lead water pipe from a metals recycler/scrapper. I melted them into ingots. I never did measure hardness, as it seemed very soft. If I find that batch this Spring when I do my 40 cal experiment, I'll have to measure the ingots, as well as some samples that have been fresh cast in a boolit mold.

[charlie b]

When we designed a .45acp HP for short barrel pistols (3.5") we used straight wheel weights. It was soft enough to get reliable expansion in beef at around 750fps. Yes, the final tests were done with a large beef roast with two layers of denim over it. It was over 10" penetration and expansion to almost 3/4". The bullets would also penetrate/break a 2" wet oak dowel. The mold used was the Lee 228RN. The key was the design of the HP. We went through 5 or 6 different designs to get one that worked and did not plug up with the cloth. Final bullet weight was just under 200gn. This was done 30 years ago. Since then better factory HPs became available so we dropped the project.

And, yes, one design did badly in the chambering process, deforming when it hit the ramp.

So, short answer is, you can just go with WW instead of pure lead. Whichever is easier for you will work.

[mehavey]

I have BHN tested numerous samples of certified pure lead and always have come up with 7.0
These are measured numbers. Pure Lead, 30-1, and Lym#2 all RotoMetal
(Note that Lym#2 -- by definition BHN15 -- comes out at 14.9)
And as the Lee is only dependent on a spring constant, I'm pretty confident in the numbers
as they are as repeatable day-day/month-month/year-year as the sun coming up.

https://s33.postimg.cc/w3puhgzcf/BHN_Chart4.jpg
NOTE-1: discussion of pure lead <5.0 here:
http://www.texas-mac.com/Evaluations_and_Recommendations_for_Lead-Alloy_Hardness_Testers.html
NOTE-2: Blue line is actual calculation of the Brinell force/indentation diameter converted to English lb/sq-in

postscript: 45 ACP/pure lead works fine.
Classic RN shape most helpful in not getting caught up on ramp lip.
https://i.postimg.cc/J7xxrJnF/45-ACP-ACC-45-200-M-200-H-Lead.jpg

[HWooldridge]

The nice thing about a super soft boolit is that the old standard hardball profile will deform on impact in most live targets, even without a hollow point. That one thing puts the 45 ACP at least on a close par to the 45 LC using BP.

[Larry Gibson]

The question was basically why does the NSIS say the BHN of 100% pure lead is 7 and everyone else seems to say it is 5 BHN give or take?

My own BHN measurements agree with the other BHN measurements listed by NSIS and everyone else but only agree with NSIS on the BHN of pure lead. I still get a BHN of 7 +/- with some certified pure lead I bought.

If someone has some 4 - 5 BHN lead I would like to get [I'll pay for it with shipping] useful sample?

[mehavey]

It was reactor (shielding) lead, Larry, since repeated with RotoMetal lead (IIRC).
But let me ship you a couple of RotoMetal/pure lead wide flat-nose 45s and see what you get on your tester.
PM me w/ an address.... ;)

[44MAG#1]

Could the word "pure" be a relative term?
Since nothing or no one is perfect we would assume, there is that famous word assume, that "pure" is near perfect in "pure" definition of the word. What if the word is used meaning more nearly "pure" but at the same time not the purest of the "pure" lead that could be obtained?
Maybe with the company that sold the lead got it from a company that said it is "pure" but really is only 99 percent pure or maybe 99.1 percent "pure" instead of 99.9 percent "pure" that we take as being as "pure" as "pure" can be in an imperfect world.
Maybe some other metal is still in the "pure" lead.
We are possibly an assuming group???

[Larry Gibson]

It was reactor (shielding) lead, Larry, since repeated with RotoMetal lead (IIRC).
But let me ship you a couple of RotoMetal/pure lead wide flat-nose 45s and see what you get on your tester.
PM me w/ an address.... ;)

PM sent

[charlie b]

We used 99.95% (oxygen free) as 'pure' for copper in the wire industry. Rotometals lists pure lead as 99.9%.

I have used 'ultra-pure' copper in lab work (high vacuum, high temp) and it was listed as better than 99.999%.

[44MAG#1]

We used 99.95% (oxygen free) as 'pure' for copper in the wire industry. Rotometals lists pure lead as 99.9%.

I have used 'ultra-pure' copper in lab work (high vacuum, high temp) and it was listed as better than 99.999%.

I would say that is as "pure" as "pure" gets in an imperfect world.

[justindad]

“Smelting” is a relative term, but not “pure.”:kidding:

[fredj338]

LHP expansion has a lot to do with the HP design. You dont need dead soft lead to get good expansion. When I cast LHP for low vel 45acp, its usually 25-1/lead-tin. The tin is mostly to help fill the nose of the HP out, expands great down to 800fps, below that, you'll want a larger/deeper HP.

[GONRA]

el cheapo GONRA loads .45 ACP with Range Brass & 230 gn Range Lead cast RN boolits.
Meets MY High Standards in 1928 Thompson SMG blasting &
precision DCM 1911 Colt .45 ACP bullseye shootin'.

[Larry Gibson]

mehavey sent me 8 bullets cast of Rotmetals pure lead.

Two of them he had tested using two different methods and came up with 4.5 and 4.8 BHN. I tested those two bullets using the Lee tool mounted in a telescope stand. They both measured 4.7 BHN with the extended scale previously posted in this thread. They both measured 5 BHN with another extended scale developed some years back and posted on this forum. That's the extended scale for the Lee tool I've been using.

309805309806

Of the other 6 bullets he sent 2 measured 4.7 BHN and 4 measured 5 BHN [5 and 6 BHN on my other scale.

Appears the "certified pure lead" Bill Ferguson sent me some years back isn't quite so "pure"

So that brings me back to my original question in this thread: If we are measuring the BHN at 5 +/- for pure lead then why does NSIS say the BHN is 7?

[mehavey]

I went looking for the NIST references that had Pb's Brinell measurements listed as "7"
and duly found them in several articles on hardness measurement techniques ...
1930, and 1936. . . Everything else and/or more recent/other official sources showed "5"

Then I ran across the Nat'l Inst of Health Pub: "Brinell hardness (high purity Pb): 4.0"
https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Lead
Drill down ref: O'Neil, M.J. (ed.). The Merck Index - An Encyclopedia of Chemicals, Drugs, and Biologicals. Cambridge, UK: Royal Society of Chemistry, 2013., p. 1004


"Interesting"

[Larry Gibson]

I've always gone with the 5 BHN so that's probably close enough. Was just confused by the NSIS BHN and getting that same measurement with the sample of supposed pure lead I was sent.

[mehavey]

Just for grins... since I already kinda knew the answer from long long ago in a casting far far away (5 years?)
I ran Rotometals 30:1 for a SAECO#446 44-40 bullet I had sitting on the shelf.

No surprises --tin-only alloys are very very soft irrespective of Internet lore -- except that the 5-year old casting hardened up by about 4 tenths of a Brinell#
(Well... my better dimple measurement ability did. ;) )

https://i.postimg.cc/pX9rSn0V/CELESTRON-Saeco-446-30-1.jpg
BRINELL# = 6.0

https://i.postimg.cc/zf3qys9z/CELESTRON-camera-Saeco-446-30-1.jpg
(Nifty little gadget. Note that it lets you "soft match" the real dimensions, even with slightly irregular objects.)